My top ten from my earlies 15 and lates 20's

The Anarcho-Primitivist case for Straight Edge:Against His-Story, Against Alcoholocaust!

The history of civilization is the history of beer. In every era and area untouched by civilization, there has been no beer; conversely, virtually everywhere civilization has struck, beer has arrived with it. Civilization – that is to say, hierarchical social structures and consequent relationships of competition, unbridled technological
development, and universal alienation – seems to be inextricably linked to alcohol.Our sages, who look back and ahead through time to see beyond the limits of such
pernicious culture, tell a parable about our past to explain this link:Most anthropologists regard the beginnings of agriculture as the inception of civilization. It was this first act of control over the land that brought human beings
to think of themselves as distinct from nature, that forced them to become sedentary and possessive, that led to the eventual development of private property
and capitalism. But why would hunter/gatherers, whose environment already provided them with all the food they needed, lock themselves in place and give up the nomadic foraging existence they had practiced since the beginning of time for something they already had? It seems more likely – and here, there are anthropologists who agree – that the first ones to domesticate themselves did so in order to brew beer.This drastic reorganization for the sake of intoxication must have shaken tribal structure and lifeways to the root. Where these “primitive” peoples had once lived in a relaxed and attentive relationship to the providing earth – a relationship that afforded them both personal autonomy and supportive community as well as a great deal of leisure time to spend in admiration of the enchanted world around them – they now alternated periods of slavish hard labor with periods of drunken incompetence and detachment. It’s not hard to imagine that this situation hastened,if not necessitated, the rise to power of masters, overseers who saw to it that the toilsome tasks of fixed living were carried out by the frequently inebriated and incapable tribespeople. Without these chiefs and the primitive judicial systems they instituted, it must have seemed that life itself would be impossible: and thus, under the foul auspices of alcoholism, the embryonic State was conceived. Such a pathetic way of life could not have been appealing to the peoples who neighbored the aboriginal alcoholic agriculturists; but as every historian knows,the spread of civilization was anything but voluntary. Lacking the manners and gentleness of their former companions in the wild, these savages, in their drunken
excesses and infringements, must have provoked a series of wars – wars which, sadly,
the lushes were able to win, owing to the military efficiency of their autocratic armies and the steady supply of food their subjugated farmlands provided. Even these advantages would not have been enough, if the brutes hadn’t had a secret weapon in their possession: alcohol itself. Adversaries who would otherwise have held their own on the field of battle indefinitely fell before the cultural onslaught of drunken debauchery and addiction, when trade – one of the inventions of the agriculturists, who also became the first misers, the first merchants – brought this poison into their midst. A pattern of conflict, addiction, defeat, and assimilationwas set in motion, one which can be traced throughout history from the cradle of civilization through the Roman wars for Empire to the holocaust perpetrated upon the natives of the New World by the murderous European colonists.But this is just a story, speculation. Let’s consult the history books (reading between the lines where we must, as these books come down to us from yesteryear’s conquering killers and their obedient slaves … that is, historians!) to see if it lines up with the evidence. We’ll start in the early years of agriculture, when the first tribes settled down – in the fertile lands around rivers, where wheat and barley were easy to grow and ferment in mass quantities.
the domestication of man – b y alcohol
Enkidu, a shaggy, unkempt, almost bestial primitive man, who ate grass and could milk wild animals, wanted to test his strength against Gilgamesh, the god-king. Gilgamesh sent a prostitute to Enkidu to learn of his strengths and weaknesses. Enkidu enjoyed a week with her during which she taught him of civilization. Enkidu knew not what bread was, nor had he learned
to drink beer. She spoke unto Enkidu: “Eat the bread now, it belongs to life. Drink also beer, as it is the custom of the land.” Enkidu drank seven cups of beer and his heart soared. In this condition he washed himself and became a civilized being.
– The first written narrative of civilization, the Epic of Gilgamesh written in 3000 bc, describes
the domestication of Enkidu the Primitive by means of beer.The oldest authenticated records of brewing were fashioned over 6000 years ago in Sumer, the oldest of human civilizations. Sumer also had the first known stateorganized religion, and the official “divine drink” of this religion was beer brewed by priestesses of Ninkasi, the Sumerian goddess of alcohol. The hymns of Ninkasi were brewing instructions! The first collection of laws, the Code of Hammurabi of Babylon, decreed a daily beer ration in direct proportion to social status: beer consumption wen hand-in-hand with hierarchy. For example, workers received two liters while besotted priests and kings got five. [For an interesting thought experiment, ask yourself how much alcohol – and of what grade – you get now,and what that says about your position in society.] Historians pondering the primacy of alcohol in these ancient lawbooks have even conjectured that the original function of hierarchy was to permit some men to hoard mass amounts of alcohol while ensuring that a sufficient labor force – pacified by their meager alcohol rations to discourage revolt or escape – was always at hand to keep farming and brewing. Kings used golden drinking straws to sip from giant containers of beer, a tradition that has been preserved in plastic throughout the Western world. The pivotal role of alcohol in this first hierarchy is easy to recognize, even from a cursory reading of these records: as in every authoritarian regime, “justice” was a cardinal concern, and the punishment decreed for all who violated any of the laws governing beer was death by drowning.Though it was yet newly-invented, beer influenced every single facet of emerging human civilization. Before the invention of money, beer was used as the standard item of barter – a money before money! In Ancient Egypt, a keg of beer was the
only proper gift to offer to the Pharaoh when proposing marriage to his daughter,and kegs of beer were sacrificed to the gods when the Nile overflowed. As civilization spread, so did beer. Even in regions as remote as Finland, beer played a crucial role from the moment civilization struck: the Kalevala, the ancient Finnish epic poem, had twice as many verses devoted to beer than to the creation of the earth.Brewing could be found wherever civilization was, from the rudimentary villages of German barbarians to the god-emperors of ancient China. Only those human beings that still lived in harmony with wilderness, such as the indigenous peoples
of North America and some sectors of Africa, remained alcohol-free – for a time.The “classical civilizations” of Greece and Rome were as soaked in alcohol as they were in blood – the entire ancient world was lost in a collective hangover. This must have helped the nobles and philosophers to gloss over the fact that their“enlightened democracy” was based on the subjection of women and masses of slaves.The greatest work of “classical” literature, the Symposium, details a drinking party starring Socrates, whose claimto-fame as a philosopher was augmented by his inhumanly high tolerance for alcohol. Studying his glorifications of the abstract over the real – provided these weren’t falsely attributed to him by his mendacious pupil, Plato – one can still catch a whiff of the sour breath of a drunk.

ARTY PROGRAM OF UNION OF MILITANT ATHEISTS

ARTY PROGRAM OF UNION OF MILITANT ATHEISTS:
Why must every Leninist know the correct Communist attitude towards religion? Why is every class-conscious worker and peasant who wants to join the Communist Party confronted with the question of religion? What have the Communists to do with god? Why are they concerned with religion? Does it make any difference to the prospects of the victory of communism whether a Communist believes in a God or gods and goddesses, or in evil spirits, or not? Is it, not possible to be a Communist and at the same time believe in religion, i. e., believe that the whole world is controlled by a god, or a number of gods, and that everything on earth is done by the will of these gods or of their assistants-the saints, or the malice of evil spirits-devils, fiends, Satan? Is it possible to live without believing in god and yet preserve "morality"?
Millions of workers and peasants who have not yet entered the road to communism ask themselves these questions, and thousands of workers who are sympathetic towards the Communist Party waver on the question of religion. Their belief in god, or in gods, their belief that without religion, without faith, without religious rites they will not know how to live right, prevent them from joining the ranks of the Communist Party. The worker in the city can more easily free himself from religious beliefs than rural workers. It is easier for young people to abandon religious beliefs; their beliefs are not so firmly rooted. It is much more difficult for old folks to shake oft" these beliefs. And as a rule it is still more difficult for women to get away from religion than men.
Every Leninist, every Communist, every class-conscious worker and peasant must be able to explain why a Communist cannot support religion; why Communists fight against religion; and every Communist must be able to answer the questions put to him by his fellow workers on this subject, he must know and understand why the Soviet Government has separated the church from the state, and the school from the church. Program of the C. P. S. U. on the question of religion: What is a program? The program of a party is the full statement of the demands and views of the party on all phases of its activities. The party program explains the struggle of the various classes in modern society, and how this society develops. Our program contains our Party's demands on all questions concerning social life. On questions of religion we had to express ourselves with precision and clarity. What does our program say on these questions? In paragraph 13 we read: With regard to religion, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union does not confine itself to the already decreed separation of church and state and of school and church, i. e., measures advocated in the programs of bourgeois democracy, which the latter has nowhere consistently carried out to the end owing to the diverse and actual ties which bind capital with religious propaganda. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union is guided by the conviction that only conscious and deliberate planning of all the social and economic activities of the masses will cause religious prejudices to die out. The Party strives for the complete dissolution of the ties between the exploiting classes and the organizations of religious propaganda, facilitates the real emancipation of the working masses from religious prejudices and organizes the widest possible scientific educational and anti-religious propaganda. At the same time it is necessary to carefully avoid giving offense to the religious sentiments of believers, which only leads to to the strengthening of religious fanaticism. (The Program and Rules of the C. P. S. U., pp. 20-21.) The program of the Communist International also states clearly that Communists fight against religion, as it is a counter-revolutionary force, an ally and a weapon of the bourgeoisie in its struggle against the revolutionary movement. . We will try to state more simply what the program of the C. P. S. U. says on the question of religion, and then we will explain it in detail. On January 23, 1918, the Soviet Government issued a decree separating the church from the state, and the schools from the church. We will speak in detail about this decree later on. But our Party is not content with passing this law, for this law alone does not yet destroy the power of religion and of the church, it only weakens it. Laws separating the church from the state, and the schools from the church, have been passed not only by the Soviet Government but also by the governments in capitalist countries. But in these capitalist countries the bourgeoisie put these laws on their statute books only for the sake of appearances, to give in to the demands of the people, while in reality they retain the connection between the church and the state, between religion and the state, and between religion and organized capital in the state. In fact, in almost all the capitalist countries the church still enjoys enormous power and tremendous wealth; and to this very day, inmost capitalist countries it still wields power in both the state and the school. Take, for instance, Italy, where in 1929, the power of the Pope the head of the Catholic Church was reestablished. In accordance with a treaty concluded with the leader of the fascists, Mussolini, the Pope was recognized as the head of the Vatican State, formed within the territory of the city of Rome. Of course, in return for this, the clergy gives still greater support to the fascists. In Germany, and in many other states, the governments likewise invest the church with far reaching rights. In the U.S.S.R., the law separating the church from the state, and the school from the church, has been actually carried out. But the law does not abolish religious organizations, nor does it prohibit religion. Our Party is. convinced that only when all social life, including economic life, proceeds according to a conscious, well. thought-out plan, will religion lose its authority over the peasantry and over the working class. This is why our Party is trying first of all to prevent the capitalists of all countries from- using religious organizations to deceive the peasant and working masses, as they are doing now. We expose the class basis of religion, that is, we lay bare the class motives of those who are interested in upholding and spreading religious beliefs. Secondly, our Party conducts a struggle against religious prejudices and religious beliefs by propagating science and general education, through books, newspapers, lectures, moving pictures, etc., all directed against religion and religious deception. As already stated, our program expressly warns all Communists and Marxists that they must, in carrying out this work act in a way that will give no avoidable offense to the sentiments of believers, because, by intentionally outraging the feelings of believers, they will only confirm them in their religious convictions. DECREES OF THE SOVIET GOVERNMENT ON THE SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE, AND OF THE SCHOOL FROM THE CHURCH On January 23, 1918, the Soviet Government issued a decree on the disestablishment of the church. This decree reads as follows: Decree of the Soviet of People's Commissars on the Separation of the Church from the State, and of the School from the Church (January 23, 1918): 1. The church is hereby separated from the state. 2. It is unlawful to pass any local law or issue any decree whatsoever within the territory of the Republics, which will restrict or limit the liberty of conscience or grant any advantage or privilege whatsoever to any citizen on the basis of his religious profession. 3. Every citizen may profess any religion he desires or profess no religion; all laws disfranchising any citizen by reason of his profession or non-profession of faith are hereby repealed. Note: No reference is to be made in any official document to the profession or non-profession of religion by any citizen. 4. No proceedings of any state or other official public body shall be accompanied by any religious rites or ceremonies whatsoever. 5. The right to perform religious rites is hereby guaranteed in so far as no breach of the peace is committed and the performance does not infringe upon any of the rights of any citizen of the Soviet Republic. Local authorities have the right in such cases to take all the measures necessary to safeguard public order and security. 6. No person may refuse to fulfill any civic obligation on the ground of his religious convictions. Exceptions to this rule may be made on the condition that another civic obligation is performed in substitution for the one declined, but this must in each separate case be considered by the People's Court. 7. Religious vows, or oaths, are abolished. Whenever necessary solemn affirmation to tell the truth is made. 8. Registration of births, marriages, deaths, etc., are performed exclusively by the civil authorities and the departments for the registration of marriages and births. 9. The school is hereby separated from the church. The teaching of religious doctrines is not permitted in any state, public, or private educational institution where general educational subjects are taught. Citizens may give or receive religious instructions privately. 10. All ecclesiastical and religious societies are subject to the general conditions governing private societies and associations, and shall not receive any privilege or subsidy from any state, local, autonomous or self-governing body. 11. No compulsory collection of dues or assessments for the benefit of ecclesiastical or religious societies is permitted, nor may any measures of compulsion or punishment of fellow-members be taken by such societies. 12. No ecclesiastical or religious society whatsoever, has the right to own private property, nor does any such society enjoy the rights of a judicial person. 13. All the property of the existing ecclesiastical and religious societies in Russia becomes the property of the people. The local or central state authorities may, by special decree, place the buildings and objects specially intended for ,worship at the service of the given religious society free of charge. What are the tasks and duties of the League of Militant Atheists during this period? Primarily, to conduct serious work among the masses, because the demands of these masses, even of the most backward groups among whom the influence of religion is still strong, have become more serious. In our work among religious people we must bear in mind Lenin's advice to utilize every method available to us, or, as he said, we must "approach them this way and that way" in order to stimulate them to criticize religion themselves. This work has not yet been properly developed. We must also work out the proper methods and produce the necessary mass literature which will meet the require?ments of these backward groups and of religious people. We must observe that the past fifteen years of struggle for consistently Leninist militant atheism have been years of struggle against every attempt to restrict the tasks of the struggle in an opportunist manner, or to give the struggle an anarchist-rebel turn. We have fought against the substitution of "pure" education, mere anticlericalism, priestophobia, for militant atheism. But at the same time we have also combated the tendency to draw a distinction between our educational work and the exposure of the class role of religion. We have linked up every step in our educational work among the masses with the task of exposing the social roots of religion. We have fought against the opportunist attempts to liquidate antireligious work on the pretext that religion is dying in the U.S.S.R. anyway. But we have also fought resolutely against the theory that religion can be wiped out in no time-that all that is required is to use strong language. This struggle on two fronts was one of the necessary conditions of the victory which we have gained on the antireligious front. This victory would have been impossible without an intense ideological struggle in the field of philosophy. For this reason the League of Militant Atheists has been closely connected with the Society of Militant Dialectical Materialists and they together have fought both against the Mechanists and against Menshevik idealism. I may remind you that the magazine, the Atheist (Bezboshnik), was the first to start the struggle against the philosophical mistakes of Deborin's school. The defect of this struggle at first was that we did not criticize the Mechanists with sufficient sharpness; but this defect was subsequently rectified. The struggle against the Mechanists and the influence of Menshevik idealism in the field of antireligious propaganda, continues to be one of our most important tasks. While we do not refuse to cooperate with the inconsistent Materialists in the antireligious struggle, we must, however, expose their mistakes; we must sharply define our own viewpoint, sharply criticize every incon?sistency on this sector of the ideological front. We have continued and must continue to criticize very strongly those who underestimate the importance of atheist propaganda; for this underestimation was one of the results of the underestimation of the role of Lenin and of Leninism as marking a new stage in the struggle for a consistent materialist world outlook. This was the particular weakness of the Deborin school, and this was precisely the reason why the magazine, Under the Banner of Marxism, failed, under its old leadership, to fulfill the task placed before it by V. I. Lenin. That is precisely why the magazine and the Society of Militant Dialectical Materialists must now devote much more attention to the problems of antireligious propaganda. That is precisely why it is necessary to introduce ideological clarity in the whole of the work of the Union of Militant Atheists and to combat every deviation from the consistent Marxiam-Leninist line in our work. Particularly immense are our tasks in our antireligious work among the various nationalities in the U. S. S. R. which are only now beginning ,to awaken to a real life-which are only beginning to develop their own culture. Among many of the nationalities the relics of pre-revolutionary ideology are still great the influence of the mullah, rabbi, shamans, lamas, etc., is still strong. The literature these nationalities possess is too poor for antireligious propaganda and they have almost no translated literature. The methods of work among the various nationalities are not yet suffi?ciently differentiated; plans for this work have not yet been prepared thoroughly. That is why it is necessary to train cadres, to study and explain the various problems, and to conduct a serious work of popularization. Our entire work must be more closely than ever linked up with the work of the Proletarian Free-Thinkers International. The atheist movement has made giant strides in many countries. No punitive measures against the Proletarian Free-Thinkers Interna?tional can stop this mass movement now that it has begun. The suppression of the League of Militant Atheists in Germany, as many observers, even from the bourgeois camp, admit, only led to the further strengthening of godlessness, to open defections from the church, to withdrawal from the parishes, etc. The growth of godlessness in the United States, the closing of churches in other countries, are inevitable accompaniments of the decay of capitalism. Of course, in these countries, too, the priests are trying to adapt themselves to the social changes that are taking place. Whenever necessary they even flirt with socialist theories. But, the exposure of the role of the church and of religion will proceed at a growing pace in the countries of capitalism and create a mighty army of militant atheists throughout the world. The only country in which the antireligious movement is able to develop openly, broadly, unhindered is the U. S. S. R. Our experi?ence is of the greatest importance to every nation. We must never forget that by our work we are rendering assistance to our foreign comrades. We must deeply internationalize our work so that every atheist should regard his work as part of our international struggle against religion and the church. The League of Militant Atheists has always closely linked its work with that of the Proletarian Free-Thinkers International. In the columns of the press of the League of Militant Atheists we inform our members and the workers generally of the work of the League, and of the struggle taking place within the Proletarian Free-Thinkers International. The delegates of our League took a most vigorous part in the defense of this international, against the demoralizing petty bourgeois influence of the social-fascist leaders of the type of Sivers, Hartwig, etc. The latter sought to utilize the international in order to subject the entire atheist movement to the interests of the bourgeoisie, to deprive atheist propaganda of its revolutionary sting, to convert the militant atheism of the masses of the workers and peasants into a liberal movement of bourgeois freethinkers. We have exposed their role. We did not allow the Siverses and Hartwigs to convert the Proletarian Free-Thinkers International into an appendage of the bourgeoisie. Thanks to this, the International continues to exist and grow throughout the world as an organization of militant atheists. It is our duty to do even more than we have done to make the antireligious movement, not only in the U.S.S.R., but in the capitalist countries as well, a movement of vast millions. We are entering the sixteenth year of the proletarian revolution with great gains to our account in the field of atheism. But these gains are insufficient; our work must be improved, consolidated, expanded, deepened. The banner of militant atheism must be raised still higher. Propaganda in favor of militant atheism must be carried on more widely, must become deeper and more serious. The ranks of the militant atheists must be increased to include millions. Remember that the struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism!---C.P.S.U. (Bolsheviks)/ George Orwell, from 1984: "It does not matter if the war is not real, or when it is, victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continous, the essential act of modern warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labor. A hierarchal society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. The war is waged by the ruling group against its subjects, and its object is not victory, but to keep the very structure of society in tact."